Good Ole Boy Responds

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Yesterday’s editorial “From Martin Luther Coon to Jesse and Al ‘Race Hustlers’” generated several on- and offline responses, the most important of which comes from the original author Don Erler whose “The Loyal Opposition Controversy” was the subject of my critique. Erler writes:

Reread my last two paragraphs and then determine whether or not I've defended Imus. See? It was sensible to drive him from the airwaves. It has, of course, created unintended consequences.

As to the race hustlers, you sound too intelligent to deny my point. You know some of the things Jackson has said and that Sharpton has simply fabricated instances of "racism." A civil rights veteran who has always pushed for equal rights, I suspect that you are ill-advised to accept help from such unscrupulous bigots. They demean you and the legitimate grievances of African Americans.

Eddie Griffin response:

Thank you, Mr. Erler, for your response and my apology if it appears that I insinuated you to be an Imus defender. Originally, I stated: “… instead of letting Imus stew in his own juice for something he said out of his own mouth, and letting street justice run its course, defenders of Imus excuse him only on the basis of his race.” Instead of being a defender, I would have classed you as an equivocator of Imus sins with the sins of those you call “race hustlers”. (Remember, there is no accidental use of words here). But being a defender, rationalizer, or equivocator is not the point. The main point was about the evolution of a ploy in semantics, from calling Martin Luther King a “civil rights pimp” to calling Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton “race hustlers”. It sounds the same now as it did in the mid-1950s. My assumption is that these characterizations are motivated for the same purpose now as then, i.e. to discredit black leadership.

Congratulations, you have at least one African-American who agrees with you.

Krystal writes:

I’ll take my stab at what the man meant by “race hustler”. That Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson (and now more and more Michael Eric Dyson) seem to exist only for the next racial injustice in our country. They come out of nowhere like the Sandman at the Apollo Show, rhyming and screaming, and acting offended on behalf of the entire race. This is their cottage industry. What would they do if someone wasn’t dragged behind a truck, called a nigger, or shot multiple times by the police annually? Hmmm…maybe solve some real community issues? I would love to hear about positive things they are doing in the community absent of shock value, and I would love to see some other African American leaders’ responses when crisis hits.

But, their being in the spotlight every time one of these incidents occurs is not their fault. It is the utter laziness of the media to go find other “leaders” who can comment on the issue at hand. This time, they found a brother from the Kansas City Star who got a little play from his editorial. But, we will probably be back to Jesse and Al the next time. Why? Because they are inflammatory and entertaining; not substantive and true change agents. How sad.

It stings when white people say it, and I completely disagree with a few of Erler’s other assertions, but I would label them “race hustlers”. I understand the full definition and I concur.

Sandy writes and asks: How do you characterize Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton?

Eddie Griffin response:

Maybe I kill several birds with this one response, keeping in mind the original thrust of my article was about the subtle use of semantics and how words and phrases are concocted to produce negative public opinion about selected black leaders.

Let me clear the air about my assessment of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton so I can get back to the usage of semantics in shaping people’s opinion. Jesse is based in Chicago, Al in New York, and I am in Fort Worth, Texas- three different cities with three very different characteristics, three different political constituencies, and three different styles of taking care of business.

I understand more about Jesse Jackson’s constituency than Jesse himself. The same is true about Sharpton. Asking me how I feel about Jesse or Sharpton is like asking me how I feel about their constituencies- the people they represent. Personally, I get along well with the boys in Chicago and New York, as long as I respect them and their choice of leadership. Also, I have seen many good programs and projects coming out of those two great cities. The people are more globally conscious, economically independent, and politically stronger than blacks down South. But Fort Worth is a friendlier, more peaceful city. And, sometimes peace, for me, is more desirable than the ugly fight over wealth and prosperity.

Over the years I have worked with brothers and sisters from Chicago and New York and have found them to be more intelligent than black people in Texas. Chicago and New York black people are not easily duped by “hustlers”, political or otherwise. Wherein, we Texans are noted for eating the whole enchilada. Only us southern, straight-off-the-farm, backwoods hicks are duped by shysters when we visit up North. (Look how many phony watches and fake diamond rings we brought back to Texas from Chicago and New York underworld hustlers). No, indigent Chicagoan and New Yorker are not fooled at all. If they chose Jackson and Sharpton as their local leaders, it was not by hook-or-crook or having the wool pulled over their eyes. Our Deep South rejection of them could very well be that we have the wool pulled over our eyes.

It may be disappointing for some to know I do not follow inferior leadership, that is to say I do not follow men, or boast men to be greater than they truly are, even the revered late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. So, what does Erler means when he writes:

As to the race hustlers, you sound too intelligent to deny my point. You know some of the things Jackson has said and that Sharpton has simply fabricated instances of "racism." A civil rights veteran who has always pushed for equal rights, I suspect that you are ill-advised to accept help from such unscrupulous bigots. They demean you and the legitimate grievances of African Americans.

I would be ill-advised to accept help from such unscrupulous bigots. Are you kidding? When has Eddie Griffin needed anything from anybody outside of Christ? I appreciate whenever Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton raises a public issue that reaches beyond their local communities. We are always here to help the poor and oppressed.

Please, Mr. Erler, don’t tell me that I cannot figure out who the poor and oppressed are. Jesse can point them out and name them by name. Can you? Do you understand and empathize with their plight, or do you transcribe blame and do nothing?

You say they “demean” legitimate grievances, some of which we would otherwise never heard of, for lack of media coverage and high profile. At least, they bring high profile to issues concerning black people. Do you know what those “legitimate grievances” are? I bet you can’t even name just one “legitimate grievance”- the key word here is “legitimate”.

Let me remind you that we, the black business community in Fort Worth have always been opposed by General Contractors in seeking a greater percentage of inclusion in public contracting. Mr. Erler, you have always been a part of the “Good Ole Boy” network. Am I just bellyaching or is this a legitimate grievance, i.e. the mandated minority inclusion laws?